It's time to end the Ponzi Scheme...

[brad]

i don't think having a horrible season one year immediately followed by an awesome season is how rebuilding/restructuring works.

not that i don't think its a good idea, just that if you're going to stink because of blowing out alot of overpaid talent, it may be unrealistic to expect that one draft and one free agency period is all it takes to fix it.

I have to agree... in the real world it isn't that simple. If it was, a lot of teams would be doing it.

A less dramatic approach might be to draft players that will eventually take over for the higher paid veterans while letting their contracts expire. Which is exactly what they appear to be doing, IMO.

[Kruunch]

How generous of you as a dedicated fan....
a whole year......wow....

In his defense, he doesn't have a whole lot of years accumulated enough to waste.

[Redeyejedi]

exactly what i have been saying 2012 was the best time to dump a few huge contracts and take the hits having a SB in hand the year before. now we are in rough shape again. no more restructuring , cut trade or let them play out there contract

I know what your saying but if u think u can repeat why would u gut the team. I did see this coming with a lot of these players. I thought they were a 9 10 win team this season ,thought the same thing last year 2. Next season unless they can get a difference making Dlineman and Im talking like a pro Bowl type pass rusher they will struggle to win 8 games

[DarkSaint]

I want superbowls. Draft well so that we can put these overpaid scrubs on the bench until their contract are up.

[Toadofsteel]

I want superbowls. Draft well so that we can put these overpaid scrubs on the bench until their contract are up.

But TC doesn't want to put them on the bench, so we need to get them off the roster so TC can't put them on the field...

[Kruunch]

I know what your saying but if u think u can repeat why would u gut the team. I did see this coming with a lot of these players. I thought they were a 9 10 win team this season ,thought the same thing last year 2. Next season unless they can get a difference making Dlineman and Im talking like a pro Bowl type pass rusher they will struggle to win 8 games

Not to mention that under the new CBA there is a minimum teams need to spend as well.

[Morehead State]

In economics, a Ponzi Scheme is borrowing from one investor promising a certain return without doing anything real to produce that result. Instead, you borrow more money from another investor to pay off the first one. This continually snowballs until the system eventually breaks and Bernie Madoff is put in jail for fraud.

Anyway, I think a variant of this is happening with our player contracts. JR is constantly restructuring contracts to be continuously more back-loaded. Players are trailing off in their playing ability while simultaneously getting more and more overpaid. Diehl, for example, despite having produced little in the past 2 seasons, has a ginormous cap hit in 2013, even if cut. Several other players leave us in similar situations (Rolle, Canty). JR is constantly restructuring other contracts to pay off the current ones and squeeze in that extra FA signing. And we're not about to cut overpaid players because the cap hits would then be rendered immediately in full instead of over a period of years.

I think we need to spend one year "rebuilding". I don't mean this in the traditional sense (hence the quotation marks), but we need to cut a lot of underperforming and/or overpaid players that are still under contact. The aforementioned Diehl, Rolle, and Canty, as well as guys like Tuck and Webster. Take all the cap hits up front. Yes the 2013 team would not be the greatest incarnation of the Giants in the world. But we would emerge in 2014 with a crapton of cap space and no overpaid underachievers on the team. From there, the possibilities are endless...

PS: I am not in favor of firing Reese. I merely want us to cut the cruft out of the team to give us a better future return. I wouldn't mind one losing season if it meant we would be incredible strong the following year. Plus it would be less stressful i think...

There is a lot of truth in this post.
We "restructure" contracts and put us deeper in the hole down the road. There will come a time (in the not too distant future) where we will collapse under our own weight unless that practice changes.

[Kruunch]

There is a lot of truth in this post.
We "restructure" contracts and put us deeper in the hole down the road. There will come a time (in the not too distant future) where we will collapse under our own weight unless that practice changes.

Yeah ... we might only eek out one more SB with those hacks.

I think the Giants do a damn fine job of marrying the cap, resignings, restructures and home grown talent.

Remember when we let Boss and Steve Smith go? Everyone thought it was the end of the world.

Conversely everyone was bagging on David Diehl last year and we went ahead and won another Super Bowl with him starting.

It's all part of the magic of GMing a modern NFL team.

[Buto]

I understand Rolle gets paid pretty good but why would you get rid of the most productive consistant player we've had on the defense over the last three or four years.
Watch the games and see who is around the ball and in on the tackle more often than not. He plays three positions Saftey, Slot CB and hybrid LB.
Four if you count both safety slots.
Rolle plays hard every game and he admits when he doesn't play his best.
I can't think of any other D player that owns up to their crappy play.

[Morehead State]

Yeah ... we might only eek out one more SB with those hacks.

I think the Giants do a damn fine job of marrying the cap, resignings, restructures and home grown talent.

Remember when we let Boss and Steve Smith go? Everyone thought it was the end of the world.

Conversely everyone was bagging on David Diehl last year and we went ahead and won another Super Bowl with him starting.

It's all part of the magic of GMing a modern NFL team.

Steve Smith, Kevin Boss and David Diehl are not examples of what we are talking about.